Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
SickSix wrote: From the books I have read so far, I would have to say the Khan is a contender. He didn't rush to judgement about what happened on Prospero. He rushed to find out for himself. He makes up his own mind and then acts carefully.
I havent yet seen where the Khan has made a bad decision on the same level as many others.
I still think Sanguinius and Guilliman have him beat, but yeah, like I said in an earlier post Khan definitely deserves an honorable mention. Throughout the novels I have read he was surprisingly levelheaded for someone who is supposed to be a Genghis Khan expy. He also didn't pick sides at the beginning of the Heresy and preferred to figure out what really happened for himself instead of believing what people were trying to tell him. He was also one of the few primarchs who treated Perturabo and Magnus with any kind of respect/friendliness.
He also told Russ to feth off when Russ called him a coward for not wanting to leave Terra to fight the Chaos advance, because Khan knew the main battle was going to be there and wanted to be present for it. Anyone who has the testicular fortitude to tell Russ to feth himself when he acts like a douchebag (which is 90% of the time) automatically deserves brownie points in my book.
Bharring wrote: The way some of the fluff is written, the wisest Primarch is always that of the [1d20] legion. Rerolled each scene.
Yes, 10% of the time they're all so freaking stupid that someone we've never read anything about is the wisest.
Lol, yeah the Emperor of Mankind novel even showed the Emperor talking to Ra about how stupid they were, he values his ten thousand far more than the Primarchs. Because they like him don't care about glory, The Emperor said, that's all the Primarchs cared about, which is why he did the whole ridiculous Ullanor celebration. He even referred to the Primarchs as ' the creatures that call him father' so brutal lol
It’s things like this that make me think the emperor isn’t truely one person as we know it, I don’t mean split personality as such, I think he literally embodies whatever “mask” he puts on when dealing with whoever he is dealing with, I started thinking this after guilliman mused on how the emperor of 40k is now incapable of showing any humanity anymore, he also suspects the emperor is more powerful now than he was in 30k.
I have to step up for my man Lorgar. He seeked out the Truth, no matter where it took him. He saw the Galaxy for what it was, and the Powers That Be for the farce that big E put up for his sons...
I cannot keep silent about the Twins either... Alpharius and Omegon were no slouch...
For me, all of the Primarchs fell to some kind of hubris, to some sort of tragic flaw that made them who they were, but the least wise of them all was probably Fulgrim... Clever, yes, wise, no...
Work in progress p&m blog :
United Colors of Chaos , Relating my ongoing battle with grey plastic...
2022 hobby running tally: bought: 71, built: 45, painted: 17, games played: 3
10000pts 4000pts 5000pts 1500pts
Bharring wrote: The way some of the fluff is written, the wisest Primarch is always that of the [1d20] legion. Rerolled each scene.
Yes, 10% of the time they're all so freaking stupid that someone we've never read anything about is the wisest.
Lol, yeah the Emperor of Mankind novel even showed the Emperor talking to Ra about how stupid they were, he values his ten thousand far more than the Primarchs. Because they like him don't care about glory, The Emperor said, that's all the Primarchs cared about, which is why he did the whole ridiculous Ullanor celebration. He even referred to the Primarchs as ' the creatures that call him father' so brutal lol
It’s things like this that make me think the emperor isn’t truely one person as we know it, I don’t mean split personality as such, I think he literally embodies whatever “mask” he puts on when dealing with whoever he is dealing with, I started thinking this after guilliman mused on how the emperor of 40k is now incapable of showing any humanity anymore, he also suspects the emperor is more powerful now than he was in 30k.
He definitely favoured the 10,000 but he just saw the Primarchs as weapons, when Land talked to him he realised that the Emperor is completely un-emotional and objective, he didn't mean to insult the Primarch's its just brutal in that they saw him as a father and that he saw them as weapons. Its hard to expect a being who is practically a god, to act like mortals or Primarchs do. I doubt the Emperor is more powerful now, during the crusade he powered and directed the astronomicon himself while leading and fighting a galactic war, I just think that the golden throne increases his power.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ChaosDad wrote: I have to step up for my man Lorgar. He seeked out the Truth, no matter where it took him. He saw the Galaxy for what it was, and the Powers That Be for the farce that big E put up for his sons...
I cannot keep silent about the Twins either... Alpharius and Omegon were no slouch...
For me, all of the Primarchs fell to some kind of hubris, to some sort of tragic flaw that made them who they were, but the least wise of them all was probably Fulgrim... Clever, yes, wise, no...
Not Lorgar at all, he spent his life worshipping the Emperor as a god and when the Emperor rebuked him he sought out other gods to believe in, that isn't wisdom at all, he ended up selling his soul for doing just that.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/06/12 20:06:54
Dorn. Of all the primarchs he avoided the most Drama. That's the real sign of wisdom there.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/06/12 20:12:07
Bender wrote:* Realise that despite the way people talk, this is not a professional sport played by demi gods, but rather a game of toy soldiers played by tired, inebriated human beings.
ChargerIIC wrote: Dorn. Of all the primarchs he avoided the most Drama. That's the real sign of wisdom there.
As I said before, I don't think Dorn is a candidate at all, he was a hot head and he went from 1 to a murderous rage out of nowhere and all the time. Not being able to handle your emotions is a sign that you aren't wise.
ChaosDad wrote: I have to step up for my man Lorgar. He seeked out the Truth, no matter where it took him. He saw the Galaxy for what it was, and the Powers That Be for the farce that big E put up for his sons...
I cannot keep silent about the Twins either... Alpharius and Omegon were no slouch...
For me, all of the Primarchs fell to some kind of hubris, to some sort of tragic flaw that made them who they were, but the least wise of them all was probably Fulgrim... Clever, yes, wise, no...
Lorgar was nuts. He basically left all his decision making to blind faith instead of reason. He never questioned his path and as a result ended up as a pawn of the Ruinous Powers. If he had been wiser he wouldn’t have flipped out as soon as the Emperor told Lorgar to stop worshipping him. As for the Hydras they made some questionable decisions involving the cabal, and when faced with the opportunity to leave some sort of contingency plan or legacy they let their legion fracture (Unless that was the plan all along, the problem with the Alpha Legion is that you can explain any questionable action as just part of a larger scheme). They squandered their resources and failed to make any lasting impact on the Heresy.
40k drinking game: take a shot everytime a book references Skitarii using transports.
Bharring wrote: The way some of the fluff is written, the wisest Primarch is always that of the [1d20] legion. Rerolled each scene.
Yes, 10% of the time they're all so freaking stupid that someone we've never read anything about is the wisest.
Lol, yeah the Emperor of Mankind novel even showed the Emperor talking to Ra about how stupid they were, he values his ten thousand far more than the Primarchs. Because they like him don't care about glory, The Emperor said, that's all the Primarchs cared about, which is why he did the whole ridiculous Ullanor celebration. He even referred to the Primarchs as ' the creatures that call him father' so brutal lol
It’s things like this that make me think the emperor isn’t truely one person as we know it, I don’t mean split personality as such, I think he literally embodies whatever “mask” he puts on when dealing with whoever he is dealing with, I started thinking this after guilliman mused on how the emperor of 40k is now incapable of showing any humanity anymore, he also suspects the emperor is more powerful now than he was in 30k.
He definitely favoured the 10,000 but he just saw the Primarchs as weapons, when Land talked to him he realised that the Emperor is completely un-emotional and objective, he didn't mean to insult the Primarch's its just brutal in that they saw him as a father and that he saw them as weapons. Its hard to expect a being who is practically a god, to act like mortals or Primarchs do. I doubt the Emperor is more powerful now, during the crusade he powered and directed the astronomicon himself while leading and fighting a galactic war, I just think that the golden throne increases his power.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ChaosDad wrote: I have to step up for my man Lorgar. He seeked out the Truth, no matter where it took him. He saw the Galaxy for what it was, and the Powers That Be for the farce that big E put up for his sons...
I cannot keep silent about the Twins either... Alpharius and Omegon were no slouch...
For me, all of the Primarchs fell to some kind of hubris, to some sort of tragic flaw that made them who they were, but the least wise of them all was probably Fulgrim... Clever, yes, wise, no...
Not Lorgar at all, he spent his life worshipping the Emperor as a god and when the Emperor rebuked him he sought out other gods to believe in, that isn't wisdom at all, he ended up selling his soul for doing just that.
Thing is he came off as cold and uemotional when dealing with Land, a admech adept who valued logic and emotion, from off hand comments he came off as warm and caring to the primarchs. I tend to agree with the theory the Emperor was a bit of a chamleon.
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two
ChargerIIC wrote: Dorn. Of all the primarchs he avoided the most Drama. That's the real sign of wisdom there.
Dorn purposely did stuff to piss Perturabo off, and got into fights with pretty much every other primarch, including Russ (whom he had a lot in common with). He most definitely didn't try to avoid drama.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Formosa wrote: It’s things like this that make me think the emperor isn’t truely one person as we know it, I don’t mean split personality as such, I think he literally embodies whatever “mask” he puts on when dealing with whoever he is dealing with, I started thinking this after guilliman mused on how the emperor of 40k is now incapable of showing any humanity anymore, he also suspects the emperor is more powerful now than he was in 30k.
I think the emperor was one individual, albeit one that had massive amounts of psychic power, could alter his appearance at will, and was a genius, both scientifically and socially. I think he was manipulating everyone around him constantly, by only showing them aspects of his personality that he thought they would react positively to. Guilliman does the same thing after he is resurrected. Here is a passage from Dark Imperium:
Spoiler:
"Roboute Guilliman settled heavily into his new throne. The Primarch had despatched all of his attendants and advisors, even sending his Honour Guard to wait outside the sanctum. At last he could allow a little of his sorrow, trauma and pain to show, and Guilliman let his mask drop with a sigh of relief. Whatever had been done to him to bring him back, it had left the Primarch with a constant, gnawing ache that radiated from deep within. He suspected that pain would never leave him.
Physical hurts were the least of Guilliman's troubles. One by one, the Primarch had spoken with each of the Celestinians, the lords of the Ultramarines, and even Yvraine of the Ynnari. Solar days had been spent in deep, earnest conversation, Guilliman using every iota of his statesman's guile to set his guests at ease, to tease from them as much information as he could, and to hide his reactions to their words. Guilliman had thanked each of his visitors for their insights and their service to the Imperium, inwardly assessing each of his guests and showing them whatever aspect of his personality was surest to render them sympathetic and voluble."
I just think the emperor was much more skilled at it. What is clear however is that the emperor was not infallible, his reaction to his webway project getting destroyed and misjudging Horus in his final moments is proof of that. It is also clear that the emperor never really cared for any of his sons on a personal level (except MAYBE Horus), nor felt anything towards his astartes. They were weapons to him, tools, resources to be used up. He cared about them only insomuch as a man cares about a favorite knife or a trusty sidearm.
I do think he was human on a fundamental level though. It is quite clear he felt emotions and actually had a true personality beyond his manipulations. His friendship with malcador and his custodes is proof of that.
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2018/06/12 23:19:28
Bharring wrote: The way some of the fluff is written, the wisest Primarch is always that of the [1d20] legion. Rerolled each scene.
Yes, 10% of the time they're all so freaking stupid that someone we've never read anything about is the wisest.
Lol, yeah the Emperor of Mankind novel even showed the Emperor talking to Ra about how stupid they were, he values his ten thousand far more than the Primarchs. Because they like him don't care about glory, The Emperor said, that's all the Primarchs cared about, which is why he did the whole ridiculous Ullanor celebration. He even referred to the Primarchs as ' the creatures that call him father' so brutal lol
It’s things like this that make me think the emperor isn’t truely one person as we know it, I don’t mean split personality as such, I think he literally embodies whatever “mask” he puts on when dealing with whoever he is dealing with, I started thinking this after guilliman mused on how the emperor of 40k is now incapable of showing any humanity anymore, he also suspects the emperor is more powerful now than he was in 30k.
He definitely favoured the 10,000 but he just saw the Primarchs as weapons, when Land talked to him he realised that the Emperor is completely un-emotional and objective, he didn't mean to insult the Primarch's its just brutal in that they saw him as a father and that he saw them as weapons. Its hard to expect a being who is practically a god, to act like mortals or Primarchs do. I doubt the Emperor is more powerful now, during the crusade he powered and directed the astronomicon himself while leading and fighting a galactic war, I just think that the golden throne increases his power.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ChaosDad wrote: I have to step up for my man Lorgar. He seeked out the Truth, no matter where it took him. He saw the Galaxy for what it was, and the Powers That Be for the farce that big E put up for his sons...
I cannot keep silent about the Twins either... Alpharius and Omegon were no slouch...
For me, all of the Primarchs fell to some kind of hubris, to some sort of tragic flaw that made them who they were, but the least wise of them all was probably Fulgrim... Clever, yes, wise, no...
Not Lorgar at all, he spent his life worshipping the Emperor as a god and when the Emperor rebuked him he sought out other gods to believe in, that isn't wisdom at all, he ended up selling his soul for doing just that.
Thing is he came off as cold and uemotional when dealing with Land, a admech adept who valued logic and emotion, from off hand comments he came off as warm and caring to the primarchs. I tend to agree with the theory the Emperor was a bit of a chamleon.
True, but he expressed why he never saw them as father etc. so with that in mind he does have to be cold and logical seeing that he thought of the Primarchs as merely weapons, even though they showed so much love and respect for him. A think a normal person would see them as sons. he's definitely a chameleon though,
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/06/12 23:22:55
would a normal person? How much of that "love and respect" was real as opposed to geneticly programed or even impelled throuygh subtle psionics?
Also the primarchs grew up away from him etc so there wasn't that connection made eaither.
So why should there be a close emotional attachment between the emperor and most of the primarchs?
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two
BrianDavion wrote: would a normal person? How much of that "love and respect" was real as opposed to geneticly programed or even impelled throuygh subtle psionics?
Also the primarchs grew up away from him etc so there wasn't that connection made eaither.
So why should there be a close emotional attachment between the emperor and most of the primarchs?
Yes, you'd obviously bond with something you created that admired, respected and loved you, especially if you have all the benevolent and selfless characteristics of the Emperor. It wasn't programmed in them because, when Land asked why they call him father he told him the story of pinocchio and how the wooden boy called his make father, they organically came to see the Emperor as such, Angron didn't though so again not programmed. Plus the traitor Primarchs grew to hate the emperor, so its obviously not programmed and is a consequence of the will. I am pointing out that 'a normal person would have an attachment' I didn't say the Emperor had an attachment to them, I already said the contrary in previous comments.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/06/13 01:12:49
BrianDavion wrote: would a normal person? How much of that "love and respect" was real as opposed to geneticly programed or even impelled throuygh subtle psionics?
Also the primarchs grew up away from him etc so there wasn't that connection made eaither.
So why should there be a close emotional attachment between the emperor and most of the primarchs?
Yes, you'd obviously bond with something you created that admired, respected and loved you, especially if you have all the benevolent and selfless characteristics of the Emperor. It wasn't programmed in them because, when Land asked why they call him father he told him the story of pinocchio and how the wooden boy called his make father, they organically came to see the Emperor as such, Angron didn't though so again not programmed. Plus the traitor Primarchs grew to hate the emperor, so its obviously not programmed and is a consequence of the will. I am pointing out that 'a normal person would have an attachment' I didn't say the Emperor had an attachment to them, I already said the contrary in previous comments.
except I'm arguing a normal person having that level of attachment to all of them simply isn't something we should take for granted. Especially as the Emperor isn't entirely benevolent and selfless. As was best described in, I think it was dark Imperium. he loves Humanity as a grand idea, individual people? well.. eggs for the omlet.
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two
BrianDavion wrote: would a normal person? How much of that "love and respect" was real as opposed to geneticly programed or even impelled throuygh subtle psionics?
Also the primarchs grew up away from him etc so there wasn't that connection made eaither.
So why should there be a close emotional attachment between the emperor and most of the primarchs?
Yes, you'd obviously bond with something you created that admired, respected and loved you, especially if you have all the benevolent and selfless characteristics of the Emperor. It wasn't programmed in them because, when Land asked why they call him father he told him the story of pinocchio and how the wooden boy called his make father, they organically came to see the Emperor as such, Angron didn't though so again not programmed. Plus the traitor Primarchs grew to hate the emperor, so its obviously not programmed and is a consequence of the will. I am pointing out that 'a normal person would have an attachment' I didn't say the Emperor had an attachment to them, I already said the contrary in previous comments.
except I'm arguing a normal person having that level of attachment to all of them simply isn't something we should take for granted. Especially as the Emperor isn't entirely benevolent and selfless. As was best described in, I think it was dark Imperium. he loves Humanity as a grand idea, individual people? well.. eggs for the omlet.
Well even the ability to have attachment for a few would still be expected if it weren't the Emperor. The Emperor is entirely selfless, he isn't always benevolent though, but he's far more benevolent than a human no human could sit in torture for 10,000 years for the whole human race. "I think it was dark Imperium. he loves Humanity as a grand idea, individual people? well.. eggs for the omlet." exactly my point, he saw the Primarchs as weapons or eggs for the omlette as you say. My point is that a normal human would have subjective and emotional responses to situations the Emperor doesn't, like with the Primarchs.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/06/13 01:46:30
w1zard wrote: Throughout the novels I have read he was surprisingly levelheaded for someone who is supposed to be a Genghis Khan expy.
Whoa now, how much do you know about Genghis Khan? He was a brilliant leader, and a very caring and compassionate man. Just not towards his enemies. The Steppe people devoted themselves to him by the hundreds of thousands, and he revolutionized the Mongolian nations culture. He gave birth to the nation of Mongolia, and his army epitomized the tenets of modern warfare. Firepower, mobility, and intelligence.
I will forever remain humble because I know I could have less.
I will always be grateful because I remember I've had less.
w1zard wrote: Throughout the novels I have read he was surprisingly levelheaded for someone who is supposed to be a Genghis Khan expy.
Whoa now, how much do you know about Genghis Khan? He was a brilliant leader, and a very caring and compassionate man. Just not towards his enemies. The Steppe people devoted themselves to him by the hundreds of thousands, and he revolutionized the Mongolian nations culture. He gave birth to the nation of Mongolia, and his army epitomized the tenets of modern warfare. Firepower, mobility, and intelligence.
He was not a caring and compassionate man. He had a tendency to take his temper out on prisoners of war and subordinates who failed him, some of whom he had tortured to death. He ordered entire cities butchered if they refused to bend the knee immediately, men, women, and children alike. He intentionally spread plagues and disease by poisoning water sources. He was also genocidal, intentionally slaughtering 3/4 of the population of the Iranian plateau, and 4/5 of the entire population of northern china. He was also one of the most prolific rapists in history, fathering an estimated 2,000 children with captured concubines.
Genghis Khan was a brutal and extremely successful warlord, possibly even the most successful one in human history. He was anything but "caring" and "compassionate", in his line of work those qualities were weaknesses.
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2018/06/15 03:58:51
w1zard wrote: He was not a caring and compassionate man. He had a tendency to take his temper out on prisoners of war and subordinates who failed him, some of whom he had tortured to death. He ordered entire cities butchered if they refused to bend the knee immediately, men, women, and children alike. He intentionally spread plagues and disease by poisoning water sources. He was also genocidal, intentionally slaughtering 3/4 of the population of the Iranian plateau, and 4/5 of the entire population of northern china. He was also one of the most prolific rapists in history, fathering an estimated 2,000 children with captured concubines.
Genghis Khan was a brutal and extremely successful warlord, possibly even the most successful one in human history. He was anything but "caring" and "compassionate", in his line of work those qualities were weaknesses.
Then all you have heard about was the legacy he left behind to his enemies. He was known for all those things that you mentioned. Some of them blatantly false. Some lies even spread by his armies, on his orders. But he was known by his people to be caring and compassionate. Its one of many reasons why he was so successful at conquering the steppes and beyond. He had the unconditional loyalty of every single one of his men. Even in China, he was respected as a king.
I will forever remain humble because I know I could have less.
I will always be grateful because I remember I've had less.
None of anything I mentioned was blatantly false. They are all historical fact, verified by multiple sources that can easily be looked up at your leisure. The 2,000 kids may not be accurate as we have no idea how many children he actually really fathered, but that is our best possible estimation. The low estimates put his offspring's number at around 1,000 while the high estimates put it around 3,000 so the historical community has settled on the middle ground.
LumenPraebeo wrote: ...He had the unconditional loyalty of every single one of his men...
It has been confirmed that all of his top generals were loyal to him on a personal level and that he treated them like family. Unfortunately this doesn't necessarily mean he was "kind" and "compassionate" because mob bosses do this kind of thing as well. Hell, Adolf Hitler was practically worshiped by the S.S, and got Germany to follow him into genocide and the second world war on just sheer charisma alone. Just because people were loyal to him does NOT mean he was a good person.
Yes, because the Chinese had been conquered by him. Hard NOT to respect someone as a king who conquers pretty much your whole known world at that point. It doesn't mean they LIKED being conquered by him.
Look, I think you are letting the "mythos" of history cloud how you perceive Genghis Khan. Was he a skilled general, superb statesman, and perhaps one of the most successful warlords in human history? Yes. Did that mean he had a warm and fluffy personality and that everyone loved him? Most likely not. As evidenced by his army's atrocities, and the atrocities he personally committed (rape) or had committed on his own orders... He was a brutal warlord who subjugated the majority of a continent, took whatever the feth he wanted, and killed anyone who tried to stop him.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2018/06/15 21:29:58
This is supposed to be about wisdom not about caring and compassion. I wouldn't confuse those terms with each other. From what I know Temujin was indeed quite a benevolent ruler to those who swore fealty to him including conquered China, I too would question a claim calling him a compassionate man. I don't question his wisdom, however. He seems extraordinarily wise in my opinion. Even in situations when he's ruthless he portrays a deep wisdom of understanding that made him quite effective and scary.
ProwlerPC wrote: This is supposed to be about wisdom not about caring and compassion. I wouldn't confuse those terms with each other. From what I know Temujin was indeed quite a benevolent ruler to those who swore fealty to him including conquered China, I too would question a claim calling him a compassionate man. I don't question his wisdom, however. He seems extraordinarily wise in my opinion. Even in situations when he's ruthless he portrays a deep wisdom of understanding that made him quite effective and scary.
Okay, going off topic with the caring and compassionate thing then. But I say and theorize that he WAS a caring and compassionate man, because I can see why he did things the way he did. I can't say that were I in his position, with the resources and time that he was able to call upon, that I'd do anything differently than him. I simply wouldn't have the courage to NOT go to all lengths possible, bordering on the extreme, to snuff out any and all potential resistance and/or enemies that might come back and bite me in the ass later. I would be the first to say that he was a brutal conqueror, and a cruel and unmerciful warlord when it came to waging war. But I also find it hard to reconcile those character traits with the other character traits when it came to being a king/statesman. He was easily friends with the people around him, and his friends and family genuinely loved him. Yes, I suppose you can say that is relatable to how mob bosses are. Keeping family and business separate from each other. But he also has a deep understanding of pain and suffering, and has gone to great lengths to alleviate as much of it as he could for the people he governed. It wasn't simply that he conquered and he won, and that's why he was Khan. He embodied the ideals that people wanted so very badly but dared not hope for, for a life on the steppe. He did a great many things that most people with his kind of power never bothered to think about. In fact, some would even view those actions as weakness or a waste of resources. So I believe he does have compassion. It just falls short, when he has to bring any measure of military might to resolve a problem.
I would also like to point out that he had a love of culture, and was a patron of both art and innovation. So he wasn't simply a Gork and Mork type of guy, with the depth and consistency of cardboard. Man is a very complicated creature. For someone like him, I think this rings more true than others.
I am also not a believer of the "Great Man" in history. I think most famously "great" men have managers, organizers, and in this case, officers underneath them that elevated these men into the eyes of the world. Often unintentionally, and perhaps even as a side effect of their work. The man in the background who doesn't lay claim to any physical or mental advantage, but has worked for years, and is very adept at his particular set of skills. (skills that make them a nightmare to people like us) That being said, there is no doubt that there are some people in the world who are more intelligent than others, and there are some who are willing to work harder than others. Sometimes there are people who are both. George Washington, Theodore Roosevelt, Leonardo Da Vinci, Genghis Khan, and perhaps another dozen or so others. I believe these men are one or both those things.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/06/16 01:18:22
I will forever remain humble because I know I could have less.
I will always be grateful because I remember I've had less.
Mr Nobody wrote: Rogal Dorn was pretty level headed. Well, most of the time. I can't think of any huge blunders before his spiral into self destruction, and that was after enormous emotional trauma.
His name was Konrad Curze and hoo boy did Dorn drop the ball on that one.
Codex was always meant to only be a guideline, never aboslute and wasn't supposed to replace adaptive thinking. And we can see in his Primarch book that good old Roboute knew how to fight Orks quite well.
I was going to say this as well. The codex was a guideline and not an instruction book. Apart from the commands to break the legions into chapters it was more of a "here's what I think works best through all of my long years of experience" kind of thing. The ultramarines turned it into a pseudo-bible once Guilliman was put into stasis.
Not true, he tried to make the codex absolute, to see every possibility and eventuality but failed, he said himself he failed when the wargames (when they were fighting mock salamanders) didn't work out, not surprising the Ultramarines took at as gospel, he didn't foresee that over time the Ultramarines would see it as to be followed explicitly and that the chapter would start being so reverent to their heirlumes.
"My teachings are yet flawed. No one, not even one such as I, can anticipate every possible outcome of battle. My words are not some holy writ that must be obeyed. There must always be room for personal initiative on the battlefield. You and I both know how one spark of heroism can turn the tide of battle. That knowledge and personal experience can only be earned in blood, and the leader in the field must always be the ultimate arbiter of what course of action should be followed."
I can't remember which book this is from, I'll look into it but it is pretty clear : the codex is not absolute
Yeah said after he realised he failed. Its from the same short story where he says he failed. Age of darkness was the book. Easy to find the quote as its at the end of the short story.
That quote is from No Know Fear. Which is what the modern interpretation of Guilliman has been going with.
He never wanted the book to be a hard and fast rulebook to war. Calth shows that it would be impossible pretty well.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/06/16 09:51:10
warboss wrote: Is there a permanent stickied thread for Chaos players to complain every time someone/anyone gets models or rules besides them? If not, there should be.
His name was Konrad Curze and hoo boy did Dorn drop the ball on that one.
Eh, all he did was confront Curze. Curze was the one who attacked Dorn. Hard to blame Dorn for not foreseeing his brother literally tearing chunks out of his flesh and later deciding to go destroy his homeworld. The latter would have happened regardless of what Dorn said anyway.
Now, I haven't read all the HH books, so there will be gaps in my logic. Feel free to fill them in. Obviously, at the beginning, Lorgar was not wise. Easily influenced, pushed around and used faith as a crutch for his weaknesses. As the heresy plays out, the way Lorgar is written seems to change. He's insane, to be sure, but the weaknesses he displayed before seem diminished.
In the short story 'Aurelian', we see a Lorgar that refuses to be manipulated by his fellow primarchs and fallows his own agenda, successfully navigating the various ambitions around the table. Lorgar even shows that he is even a physical threat, quickly and viciously subduing Fulgrim. Sure, Lorgar caught him with a sucker punch, but that's not something we've seen before. Later, Lorgar goes for a bit of a walkabout in the Eye of Terror. He gets to see the ruins of the Eldar and he reflects on if mankind is next. Unlike Horus, Lorgar is a bit cognizant of what siding with chaos really means and accepts the reality of the path he has chosen. You can still argue that he is insane or deluded, but I think the fact that he successfully negotiates and implements daemonic powers puts him a step above the other traitors.
Lorgar also successfully manipulated the war in Ultramar to create the ruinstorm. In another short story, some Word Bearers successfully pierce the ruinstorm to communicate with Lorgar and plead him to return to the war in Ultramar. He promptly dismisses him, explaining that war in Ultramar is no longer his primary concern. Other Primarchs would have remained stuck in Ultramar, obsessing over burning every single planet and seeing Guilliman dead. Lorgar sees the bigger picture and knows when to quit.
Now this can all be wiped away as more books come out. We might see Lorgar make some stupid moves or his plans fall apart.
Basically, heresy Lorgar can potential be considered wise. Or wiser than pro-Imperium Lorgar.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/06/16 21:03:42
Ask yourself: have you rated a gallery image today?
His name was Konrad Curze and hoo boy did Dorn drop the ball on that one.
Eh, all he did was confront Curze. Curze was the one who attacked Dorn. Hard to blame Dorn for not foreseeing his brother literally tearing chunks out of his flesh and later deciding to go destroy his homeworld. The latter would have happened regardless of what Dorn said anyway.
Curze: Fulgrim, life sucks 'cause I keep having these visions of all the Primarchs fighting each other, and they're going to come true.
Fulgrim: Hey Dorne, Curze keeps having visions that the Imperium is gonna split apart, and his visions always come true. Maybe you should talk to him about that.
Dorne: Curze, cut that out. It's impossible that a Primarch would attack ano- *BAM!* *POW*
Years later
Dorne: Garro, it is IMPOSSIBLE that Primarchs would turn on each other.
No, just... no. The man willingly turned into a servant of the chaos gods knowing full well what they were all about, simply because he could not conceive of a universe where he wasn't worshiping a higher power.
The emperor tells Lorgar that he is not a "higher power" so Lorgar starts seeking out a "higher power" to worship. Instead of doing the thing any sane or rational person would do after finding out what chaos has planned for humanity and telling the chaos gods to feth off, he intentionally joins them because they were the closest things he had found to real, actual gods.
Imagine if someone told you that IRL god was actually the devil the entire time. Instead of saying "Yeah I'm not going to be religious then", Lorgar basically says "Well then hand me a robe and start the blood sacrifices because god is god baby."
Someone please tell me that wizards oversimplifying Lorgars fall to Chaos. Tell me Lorgar didn't turn to Chaos literally because he can't handle athiesm.
tremere47-fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate, leads to triple riptide spam
pm713 wrote: Someone please tell me that wizards oversimplifying Lorgars fall to Chaos. Tell me Lorgar didn't turn to Chaos literally because he can't handle athiesm.
He is grossly over simplifying it, but he isn’t wrong.
Lorgar believed in the primordial truth long before he believed the emperor was a god, that came later with the visions of the emperor coming to colchis, so when rebuffed he just fell on what he knew to be true, blame Kor phaeron for that one, the guy was a full on child abuser by our standards and would regularly beat lorgar as he grew, he also used psychological abuse and manipulation on lorgar... it’s hardly a surprise he was so morally weak when his growth was slowed in such a way, he and angron have that in common which goes a way to explaining his actions in the betrayer.
Pre-Heresy it was probably Horus just because he was brought into the Imperium far sooner than his brothers and wisdom by definition comes with experience. Many will point to his turning to Chaos as proof to the contrary but he was deceived with false information and after his corruption his actions were no longer his own as can be proven when he laments his actions to his father while on the verge of death begging to die before the dark gods can control him again...
BigbyWolf wrote: Pre-Heresy it was probably Horus just because he was brought into the Imperium far sooner than his brothers and wisdom by definition comes with experience. Many will point to his turning to Chaos as proof to the contrary but he was deceived with false information and after his corruption his actions were no longer his own as can be proven when he laments his actions to his father while on the verge of death begging to die before the dark gods can control him again...
given the HH series has not reached the point where Horus is killed I'd question that, also ALL the primarchs where tempted at some point or another, Horus failed his test of character
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two
10000pts 
4000pts 
5000pts 
1500pts 
